There was once a time when society only stigmatized drug use, but in today’s society it has been criminalized as well. Nixon’s declaration for the war on drugs became the catalyst for increased punishment for drug crimes, leading to more people spending time incarcerated because of nonviolent drug crimes. However, the time has come to compare the effectiveness of incarceration versus rehabilitation as a means of managing the problem of drug use. At the same time, considering the factor of one 's socioeconomic status as a contributor to incarceration for drug use. Effective change is needed to reduce the expanding rates of incarceration in the United States through the legal reform of punishments for nonviolent drug crimes, increasing funding
…show more content…
From an economic perspective one could conclude that if the cost of incarceration is high, then the results must be effective. Further, with the Drug War in its fourth decade running, one would expect to see positive results from the increased sentences on drug crimes, results that can show reductions in drug use and recidivism rates. However, a study conducted in Missouri by Spohn and Holleran concluded that incarceration for drug charges actually increased the chances of recidivism and in fact “had significantly higher recidivism rates than any other offenders” (329-352). If the intended goal is to reduce crime and recidivism rates, then there should be a clear reduction in the rate of recidivism, but that is simply not the case. According to Husak, “two-thirds of all ex-offenders convicted in the state court are rearrested within three years, and one-third return because of parole violations” (6). This brings into question the purpose of incarceration: is it to punish, to control, to get vengeance? Consequently, these are all motives that lead to negative recurring consequences, such as recidivism. If the system is ineffective, then it may be time to rethink its goal or …show more content…
In the documentary film, In Your Hands: Life After Prison, it shows the struggle of two people who are released from prison and their struggle with homelessness, lack of employment, and the temptation of falling back to the road that leads to incarceration (In Your Hands). In a word, the incredible economic disadvantages faced by many ex-offenders can make it an impossible task to raise their socioeconomic status. This also leave them statically more vulnerable to recidivism. Similarly, in the study by Pettit and Lyons, their findings support the claim that incarceration reduces one’s chances of becoming financially independent which in turn increases one’s chances of incarceration (749). Under the circumstance, what this society needs is to reveal the compassion within, the compassion one feels when looking at life through someone else’s eyes. If people choose to commit a crime for their survival, then compassion is due for the situations that people find themselves in. Further, everyone makes mistakes, but when resources and opportunities are available to people, then correcting those mistakes can be easier to do. In contrast, without the proper resources any mistake made, no matter how small, can have catastrophic consequences. It is the inequality built into the criminal justice system that further fuels its disservice to the
From an economic perspective one could conclude that if the cost of incarceration is high, then the results must be effective. Further, with the Drug War in its fourth decade running, one would expect to see positive results from the increased sentences on drug crimes, results that can show reductions in drug use and recidivism rates. However, a study conducted in Missouri by Spohn and Holleran concluded that incarceration for drug charges actually increased the chances of recidivism and in fact “had significantly higher recidivism rates than any other offenders” (329-352). If the intended goal is to reduce crime and recidivism rates, then there should be a clear reduction in the rate of recidivism, but that is simply not the case. According to Husak, “two-thirds of all ex-offenders convicted in the state court are rearrested within three years, and one-third return because of parole violations” (6). This brings into question the purpose of incarceration: is it to punish, to control, to get vengeance? Consequently, these are all motives that lead to negative recurring consequences, such as recidivism. If the system is ineffective, then it may be time to rethink its goal or …show more content…
In the documentary film, In Your Hands: Life After Prison, it shows the struggle of two people who are released from prison and their struggle with homelessness, lack of employment, and the temptation of falling back to the road that leads to incarceration (In Your Hands). In a word, the incredible economic disadvantages faced by many ex-offenders can make it an impossible task to raise their socioeconomic status. This also leave them statically more vulnerable to recidivism. Similarly, in the study by Pettit and Lyons, their findings support the claim that incarceration reduces one’s chances of becoming financially independent which in turn increases one’s chances of incarceration (749). Under the circumstance, what this society needs is to reveal the compassion within, the compassion one feels when looking at life through someone else’s eyes. If people choose to commit a crime for their survival, then compassion is due for the situations that people find themselves in. Further, everyone makes mistakes, but when resources and opportunities are available to people, then correcting those mistakes can be easier to do. In contrast, without the proper resources any mistake made, no matter how small, can have catastrophic consequences. It is the inequality built into the criminal justice system that further fuels its disservice to the